Discover Top Posts Tagged with #cgst rules

GST cancellation quashed as show-cause notice lacked specific reasons and retrospective cancellation was imposed without prior intimation or objective satisfaction

Case Summary — M/s Een Een Sales Corporation v. Assistant Commissioner of Central Goods and Services Tax, Badli Division Court: High Court of DelhiPetition No.: W.P.(C) 331/2024 & CM Appl. 1505/2024Judgment Date: 10 January 2024Relevant Provisions: Section 29(2) of the CGST Act, 2017; Rule 21 & 22 of CGST Rules, 2017Category: GST Registration Cancellation – Natural Justice – Retrospective…

#CGST Rules #Delhi High Court #GST Law #GST Registration Cancellation #Natural Justice #Retrospective Cancellation #Section 29(2)#Vague SCN

Demand under Section 73(5) set aside as premature because earlier refund rejection order based on alleged forged ITC was already under appeal and adjudication had not attained finality.

Case Summary: Abhishek Gumber v. Commissioner of GST, New Delhi Court: Delhi High CourtPetition No.: W.P.(C) 9629/2022 & CM No. 28733/2022Date of Judgment: 06.07.2022Statutory Provisions Involved: Sections 73(5), 75, 74, CGST Act, 2017, Rule 142(1A) and Rule 92(3) of the CGST Rules, 2017Category: Demand – Premature Action / Refund – Forged ITC Allegation Facts of the Case (Paras 1–4 of the…

#CGST Rules #Delhi High Court #DRC-01A #forged ITC #GST appellate proceedings #GST demand quashed #GST Litigation #GST Refund #Section 73(5)#Section 75

Refund rejection set aside as erroneous HSN classification and Rule 36(4) mismatches were held insufficient to deny refund without proper evaluation of documents for the relevant refund period

Case: Simran Chandwani v. Principal Commissioner of CGST, Delhi North & Ors. Court: High Court of DelhiPetition No.: W.P.(C) 8164/2022Date of Judgment: 06.10.2023Category of Dispute: Refund – Inverted Duty StructureRelevant Provisions: Section 54, CGST Act, 2017 (Refund) Rule 89, CGST Rules, 2017 (Refund for inverted duty) Rule 36(4), CGST Rules, 2017 (Restriction on ITC) HSN Classification…

#CGST Rules #Delhi High Court #GST Refund #HSN misclassification #Inverted Duty Structure #ITC Refund #Rule 36(4)

Refund deficiency memo quashed as the Court held that an RFD-03 deficiency intimation cannot be issued when all mandatory documents under Rule 89(2) were submitted, rendering the officer’s action ultra vires the CGST Rules.

Case Details Case Title: AB Enterprises v. Commissioner of Delhi Goods and Services Tax Court: High Court of Delhi Petition No.: W.P.(C) 7919/2023 Category of Dispute: Refund – Unutilised ITC on zero-rated supplies Date of Judgment: 21 November 2023 Relevant Statutory Provisions: Section 54, CGST Act – Refund of tax Rule 89(2), (3), (4), Rule 90(2), 90(3), 90(5), CGST Rules –…

#CGST Rules #Deficiency Memo #Delhi High Court #Export ITC refund #GST Refund #RFD-03 #RFD-08 #Rule 89(2)#Section 54 #zero-rated supplies

ITC ledger blocking quashed as pre-decisional hearing and “reasons to believe” were absent, rendering the action arbitrary under Rule 86A

Case Summary: The Lead Factory v. Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, High Court of Karnataka, W.P. No. 7301 of 2025, decided on 14.03.2025 – Category: Input Tax Credit (Rule 86A blocking of ledger) Relevant Provisions: Rule 86A of the CGST/SGST Rules, 2017; Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India Facts (Para 1–3): The petitioner, The Lead Factory, challenged the order…

#CGST Rules #GST #GST Compliance #Input Tax Credit #ITC Blocking #Judicial Review #K-9 Enterprises #Karnataka High Court #Natural Justice #Rule 86A

GST recovery stayed as Rule 96(10) validity under challenge and amendment by Government considered

Case Details Court: High Court of Judicature at AllahabadCase No.: Writ Tax No. 1534 of 2024Petitioner: M/s Saru Silver Alloys Pvt LtdRespondents: Union of India & OthersDate of Order: 06.12.2024Relevant Provisions: Rule 96(10) of CGST Rules, 2017; Rule 86(4B)(b) of CGST Rules, 2017Category of Dispute: Refund – Export related restrictions under Rule 96(10) Facts (Para 1–2) The petitioner…

#CGST Rules #export benefits #GST Litigation #GST Refund #High Court Stay #Rule 96(10)#Saru Silver Alloys case

Recovery Stayed on Refund Restriction under Rule 96(10) – Interim Relief

Case Title: M/s Saru Silver Alloys Pvt Ltd v. Union of India & Ors.Court: High Court of Judicature at AllahabadPetition No.: Writ Tax No. 1534 of 2024Category of Dispute: Refund – Validity of Rule 96(10), CGST RulesDate of Order: 06.12.2024Relevant Provisions: Section 16, 54 of the CGST Act, Rule 96(10) & Rule 86(4B)(b) of the CGST Rules Facts of the Case The petitioner challenged the…

#Allahabad High Court #CGST Rules #Cosmo Films Case #export refund restriction #GST litigation 2024 #GST Refund Dispute #Rule 96(10)#Sance Laboratories case

Most Important Advisory On E-Invoice Issued By GSTN

Meaning Of IRP PortalGSTN Advisory On E-Invoice The GSTN has issued an advisory on time limit for reporting e-invoice on the IRP Portal by taxpayers with an AATO of 10 crores and above. Meaning Of IRP Portal To understand the advisory, let’s first understand the meaning of the IRP Portal: (1.) IRP is the website for uploading/ reporting of invoices by the notified persons. (2.) Vide…

#CGST RULES #E-INVOICE #GST #GST PORTAL #GSTN PORTAL

#cgst rules

Trending Tags

Recently Viewed Tags

#cgst rules